Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

[Barb Junkkarinen]

David,

And there is also this e-mail from Judyth to Mary Ferrell, written by Judyth herself, in which Judyth writes Cancun...

Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 23:04:36 -0400 (EDT)

From: ElectLad...@aol.com

Subject: Re: Your list

To: maryf...@swbell.net

X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 120

In a message dated 10/09/2000 9:45:20 PM Central Daylight Time,

maryf...@swbell.net writes:

> Rorke and Sullivan disappeared

> 9/24/63. Last seen in Cozumel, Mexico. Sullivan's daughter, Sherry

> Sullivan is a friend (of Mary Ferrell).

OH!!!!!! Rorke originally was supposed to fly ME from Eglin Air Force

base to Cancun!!!!!!! (emphasis mine-bj)

Judyth kept denying she had ever said/written Cancun to Mary ... here's a post she put up to me ... and I responded with the above quote:

Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk, alt.assassination.jfk

From: Barb Junkkarinen <barbREMOVE...@comcast.net>

Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2004 06:18:03 GMT

Local: Sat, Jul 3 2004 11:18 pm

Subject: Re: Judyth and Cancun

Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

On 4 Jul 2004 01:55:18 -0400, elec...@xs4all.nl (Judyth Baker) wrote:

>Barb Junkkarinen <barbREMOVE...@comcast.net> wrote in message <news:0pbee0t5q87r4h9hf6pffi3f03p9porar7@4ax.com>...

>> On 3 Jul 2004 16:25:35 -0400, elec...@xs4all.nl (Judyth Baker) wrote:

>TOP POST

>Dear Barb:

>No, Barb.

>I never wrote any such things to Mary Ferrell.

>I am aware that Mary Ferrell made both errors -- in a post

>appropriated by this newsgroup. I would appreciate your placing the

>quotations which you say came from me in full view, in context. I

>would also like to know where you got these quotations from. I have

>been 'misquoted' before. Show me the quotes, Barb. Thank you.

>Regards, Judyth Vary Baker

As I said in my response to you, and to Martin before that, the e-mail

quote I am referring to is further down in this post. Here, I'll paste

the specific portion being referred to here:

QUOTE

> >> >>><Quote on>

> >> >>>Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 23:04:36 -0400 (EDT)

> >> >>>From: ElectLad...@aol.com

> >> >>>Subject: Re: Your list

> >> >>>To: maryf...@swbell.net

> >> >>>X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 120

> >> >>>In a message dated 10/09/2000 9:45:20 PM Central Daylight Time,

> >> >>>maryf...@swbell.net writes:

> >> >>>> Rorke and Sullivan disappeared

> >> >>>> 9/24/63. Last seen in Cozumel, Mexico. Sullivan's daughter, Sherry

> >> >>>> Sullivan is a friend (of Mary Ferrell).

> >> >>>OH!!!!!! Rorke originally was supposed to fly ME from Eglin Air Force

> >> >>>base to Cancun!!!!!!!

> >> >>><Quote off>

END QUOTE

Barb :-)

Bests,

Barb :-)

To Pat Speer, and others:

Agreed: the tape of my March 4, 2000 conversation with Judyth is completely unnecessary to evaluate Judyth’s credibility, and grasp the essential absurdity of most of her claims. All of this was debated ad nausea 10 years ago. Prof. Fetzer, perhaps unaware of the extent of this, is recycling the same old/same old.

For example, does Jim Fetzer fully understand the extent to which Judyth is already on record—and in writing—with most of this stuff??

Again, I advise: Just visit Dave Reitzes website—and his section of Judyth.

The link: http://www.jfk-online.com/judyth-story.html

For convenience, below my typed signature is the section in which he narrates the goofy back and forth of the “Cancun” part of the debate, which surfaced after Robert Chapman pointed out that Cancun did not exist as a resort back then, and Judyth was confronted with this major gaffe. As he narrates the back and forth of her “defense” (and the ebb and flow of this “debate”) each of his sentences carries a footnote, and the footnotes themselves refer back to voluminous documentation he culled –and organized—from the Internet news groups (and then printed below his narrative). So each refer back to specific posts of Judyth herself, Platzman, and Shackelford.

Again and again, Judyth offers explanations and excuses for her Cancun gaffe that are the linguistic and syntactical equivalent of “My dog ate it [i.e., my dog ate the homework]”.

Example 1: Judyth Vary Baker, Internet forum post, October 9, 2004:

QUOTE: "The Cancun matter was an insertion by my literary agent that was missed by Dr.Platzman [sic]. He took the blame for allowing it to remain in the manuscript. But it was my fault, too.. . .

Lee indeed said we would meet in a fine hotel, but his tone of voice was so full of irony I didn't know if he was joking. He never said we would meet in Cancun. Typos and errors will happen. That we would meet in an area NEAR present-day Cancun is what was always meant, and if I typed Cancun instead, God forgive me. . . END QUOTE

DSL note: This is after numerous other posts in which she claimed she never said any such thing (and I was accused of malice, simply because I accurately reported what she told me on the phone, on March 4, 2000).

Example 2 (from Shackelford, on September 27, 2004):

QUOTE : "It has NOTHING AT ALL TO DO with the resort being there in 1963--they weren't planning on going to a resort. They were planning to go to the Yucatan and look at the ruins. '' wasn't supposed to refer specifically to the ruins either--just the area." END QUOTE

Example 3—Judyth, newsgroup post, July 5, 2004:

QUOTE: "The actual location was not where Lee and I expected to go to a hotel, only to meet . . . we were going to then go explore Chichen Itza, which was supposed to be relatively close, and ruins, all of which we believed from a book [sic] we read together was in Quintana Roo . . . we were going to go to a fine hotel...maybe that was a joke of Lee's...and we were going to get a Catholic priest to marry us." UNQUOTE

((DSL comment: Attention All Readers Please Note: Lee, an atheist, and married to Marina, loving his daughter June, and happily expecting the birth of his second child. . . was planning to go off with this lady “to get a Catholic priest to marry us” ?! - - -Oh pleeez.))

Example 4: --Judyth herself, Internet post, October 9, 2004:

QUOTE "Lee never mentioned the name of this city as a meeting place. He spoke of Merida in other contexts. I decided this must have been the 'city' in the Yucatan where we hoped to marry - on my own, as he mentioned we would be flying from the city where we would marry on the Cayman islands. When, later, I learned that flights from Merida to the Cayman Islands were known to occur, I then assumed the city was Merida." UNQUOTE

And Jim Fetzer thinks a tape made in March, 2000, is necessary to see whether Cancun could perhaps have been confused (by me) with Kankun, and that “that” offers an explanation for this farce?

DSL

4/30/10 2:30 AM PDT

Los Angeles, CA

Copied below from the Reitzes website, the section on Judyth, and specifically, the part of the narrative about her meeting Lee at Cancun. Each of the numbered notes refer to his documentation, which appears beneath the essay, at his website.

NOW QUOTING. . . :

Had Oswald escaped Dallas alive, he and Judyth planned to meet at a fine hotel in Cancun, Mexico, and get married. (It was subsequently pointed out by David Lifton and Robert Chapman that Cancun was an uninhabited jungle in 1963; the resort city was conceived years later.) (96)

Judyth never said that she and Oswald planned to meet in a fine hotel in Cancun! This is a malicious fabrication by David Lifton.(97)

Judyth never said that she and Oswald planned to meet in a fine hotel in Cancun! This is a malicious fabrication by David Lifton and John McAdams. (98)

Judyth never said that she and Oswald planned to meet in a fine hotel in Cancun! This is a malicious fabrication by Dave Reitzes. (99)

Judyth never said that she and Oswald planned to meet in a fine hotel in Cancun! This was erroneously inserted into her manuscript by co-author Howard Platzman. (100)

No, it wasn't.(101)

Judyth never said that she and Oswald planned to meet in a fine hotel in Cancun! This was erroneously inserted into her manuscript by her former agent, Peter Cox.(102)

No, it wasn't.(103)

Well, maybe it was.(104)

Hypothetically speaking. (105)

Okay, Judyth said it after all. (106)

But she didn't mean it. She only meant Cancun as a rough geographical indicator of where the planned meeting-place actually had been. (107)

What she meant was that she and Oswald planned to meet in a fine hotel in the rustic village of Kankun, Mexico.(108)

Actually, Cancun and the fine hotel had nothing to do with each other; some of the words were accidentally reversed in that particular draft of her manuscript. (109)

Perhaps "fine hotel" was merely a joke on Oswald's part. (110)

Of course "fine hotel" was merely a joke on Oswald's part, and Judyth knew that at the time. (111)

Nevertheless, she and Oswald might have ended up staying in a fine hotel just the same. (112)

Judyth and Oswald actually planned to meet in Chichen Itza, Mexico -- 125 miles from present-day Cancun. (113)

Judyth and Oswald actually planned to meet in Merida, Mexico -- 200 miles from present-day Cancun. (114)

Judyth and Oswald actually planned to meet in Belize, Mexico -- 350 miles from present-day Cancun. (Note: There was no Belize in 1963; it was called British Honduras until years later.) (115)

Judyth and Oswald actually planned to meet in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico -- well over a thousand miles from present-day Cancun. (116)

Judyth and Oswald actually planned to marry in the Cayman Islands of the Caribbean; Cancun was just a stopover. (117)

Judyth and Oswald actually planned to marry in Mexico. Exploration of ancient Mayan ruins and a visit to a large city in the Yucatan were additional possible plans. After marriage, their final destination was probably going to be the Cayman Islands. (118)

END QUOTE

Again, for a detailed exposition of all the footnotes (and much other information on the Judyth story), just go Reitzes website (and again, to this link, for the footnotes):

http://www.jfk-online.com/judyth-story.html

[Pamela Brown]

DL tries to spin a strawman again:Agreed: the tape of my March 4, 2000 conversation with Judyth is completely unnecessary to evaluate Judyth’s credibility, and grasp the essential absurdity of most of her claims. All of this was debated ad nausea 10 years ago. Prof. Fetzer, perhaps unaware of the extent of this, is recycling the same old/same old.

Lifton is trying to avoid the main issue by creating a strawman. He disregards the fact that every post he makes on the subject of his illegal tape causes us to have flashbacks about the fox guarding the henhouse.

What is Lifton concealing by refusing to release a copy of the tape to Jim Fetzer? Whatever it is, it must be a bombshell, because he has gone to great extremes to take our attention off of this issue.

[Barb Junkkarinen]

They were using tiny marmosets,...

Ahh, that explains it ... they were *tiny* marmosets ... no wonder she forgot about

them and they weren't part of her original story ...

Tiny marmosets die quickly without their parents. Marmosets live in FAMILIES and require large cages.

Marmosets were not used for medical research in 1963.

I was being a tad sarcastic, Jack. Marmosets of any size are quite the late comers to her story ...

Bests,

Barb :-)

[Pamela Brown]

BJ proclaimed:And there is also this e-mail from Judyth to Mary Ferrell, written by Judyth herself, in which Judyth writes Cancun...

We have seen that there are two Judyth camps -- those who weigh the objective documentation that LHO and JVB working together at Reily is sufficient to open the door to the fact that they knew each other and to give Judyth an open forum, and those who dismiss the evidence and claim they *did not* know each other. For the sake of discussion, let's call the camps "open" and "closed".

How then, shall we weigh information coming from those in the "closed" camp? This group as already decided LHO and JVB *didn't* know each other in the first place. Therefore, any information that they present should be received by the *open* camp with not only objectivity but curiousity. What is being left out? What is being distorted? What is misrepresented? What was obtained illegally? Once that is done, the actual value of the information can be appropriately assessed.

[Barb Junkkarinen]

BJ proclaimed:And there is also this e-mail from Judyth to Mary Ferrell, written by Judyth herself, in which Judyth writes Cancun...

We have seen that there are two Judyth camps -- those who weigh the objective documentation that LHO and JVB working together at Reily is sufficient to open the door to the fact that they knew each other and to give Judyth an open forum, and those who dismiss the evidence and claim they *did not* know each other. For the sake of discussion, let's call the camps "open" and "closed".

How then, shall we weigh information coming from those in the "closed" camp? This group as already decided LHO and JVB *didn't* know each other in the first place. Therefore, any information that they present should be received by the *open* camp with not only objectivity but curiousity. What is being left out? What is being distorted? What is misrepresented? What was obtained illegally? Once that is done, the actual value of the information can be appropriately assessed.

Working at the same place at the same time obviously "opens the door" for Judyth and LHO having known one another .... but it does not make it a "fact." But Judyth does have a piece of evidence that could tip that scale to showing that they did know one another. You avoid comment on that. Perhaps because you are aware that there have been calls to have that evidence examined by a professional for years ... to no avail.

Most interested in establishing truth weigh all evidence on its own merit. Is the information substantiated? Is it from a reliable source known to be credible? What I posted are quotes from Judyth herself.

You have been making the exact same comments ... and offering little, if anything, else for years. You seem to prefer to perpetuate divisiveness and cast aspersions on those who don't see things the way you do ... all the while saying "we can agree to disagree."

Pppffffflllllt.

[Kathleen Collins]

To Pat Speer, and others:

Example 1: Judyth Vary Baker, Internet forum post, October 9, 2004:

QUOTE: "The Cancun matter was an insertion by my literary agent that was missed by Dr.Platzman [sic]. He took the blame for allowing it to remain in the manuscript. But it was my fault, too.. . .

Lee indeed said we would meet in a fine hotel, but his tone of voice was so full of irony I didn't know if he was joking. He never said we would meet in Cancun. Typos and errors will happen. That we would meet in an area NEAR present-day Cancun is what was always meant, and if I typed Cancun instead, God forgive me. . . END QUOTE

DSL note: This is after numerous other posts in which she claimed she never said any such thing (and I was accused of malice, simply because I accurately reported what she told me on the phone, on March 4, 2000).

Example 2 (from Shackelford, on September 27, 2004):

QUOTE : "It has NOTHING AT ALL TO DO with the resort being there in 1963--they weren't planning on going to a resort. They were planning to go to the Yucatan and look at the ruins. '' wasn't supposed to refer specifically to the ruins either--just the area." END QUOTE

Example 3—Judyth, newsgroup post, July 5, 2004:

QUOTE: "The actual location was not where Lee and I expected to go to a hotel, only to meet . . . we were going to then go explore Chichen Itza, which was supposed to be relatively close, and ruins, all of which we believed from a book [sic] we read together was in Quintana Roo . . . we were going to go to a fine hotel...maybe that was a joke of Lee's...and we were going to get a Catholic priest to marry us." UNQUOTE

((DSL comment: Attention All Readers Please Note: Lee, an atheist, and married to Marina, loving his daughter June, and happily expecting the birth of his second child. . . was planning to go off with this lady “to get a Catholic priest to marry us” ?! - - -Oh pleeez.))

Example 4: --Judyth herself, Internet post, October 9, 2004:

QUOTE "Lee never mentioned the name of this city as a meeting place. He spoke of Merida in other contexts. I decided this must have been the 'city' in the Yucatan where we hoped to marry - on my own, as he mentioned we would be flying from the city where we would marry on the Cayman islands. When, later, I learned that flights from Merida to the Cayman Islands were known to occur, I then assumed the city was Merida." UNQUOTE

And Jim Fetzer thinks a tape made in March, 2000, is necessary to see whether Cancun could perhaps have been confused (by me) with Kankun, and that “that” offers an explanation for this farce?

DSL

4/30/10 2:30 AM PDT

Los Angeles, CA

Copied below from the Reitzes website, the section on Judyth, and specifically, the part of the narrative about her meeting Lee at Cancun. Each of the numbered notes refer to his documentation, which appears beneath the essay, at his website.

NOW QUOTING. . . :

Had Oswald escaped Dallas alive, he and Judyth planned to meet at a fine hotel in Cancun, Mexico, and get married. (It was subsequently pointed out by David Lifton and Robert Chapman that Cancun was an uninhabited jungle in 1963; the resort city was conceived years later.) (96)

Judyth never said that she and Oswald planned to meet in a fine hotel in Cancun! This is a malicious fabrication by David Lifton.(97)

Judyth never said that she and Oswald planned to meet in a fine hotel in Cancun! This is a malicious fabrication by David Lifton and John McAdams. (98)

Judyth never said that she and Oswald planned to meet in a fine hotel in Cancun! This is a malicious fabrication by Dave Reitzes. (99)

Judyth never said that she and Oswald planned to meet in a fine hotel in Cancun! This was erroneously inserted into her manuscript by co-author Howard Platzman. (100)

No, it wasn't.(101)

Judyth never said that she and Oswald planned to meet in a fine hotel in Cancun! This was erroneously inserted into her manuscript by her former agent, Peter Cox.(102)

No, it wasn't.(103)

Well, maybe it was.(104)

Hypothetically speaking. (105)

Okay, Judyth said it after all. (106)

But she didn't mean it. She only meant Cancun as a rough geographical indicator of where the planned meeting-place actually had been. (107)

What she meant was that she and Oswald planned to meet in a fine hotel in the rustic village of Kankun, Mexico.(108)

Actually, Cancun and the fine hotel had nothing to do with each other; some of the words were accidentally reversed in that particular draft of her manuscript. (109)

Perhaps "fine hotel" was merely a joke on Oswald's part. (110)

Of course "fine hotel" was merely a joke on Oswald's part, and Judyth knew that at the time. (111)

Nevertheless, she and Oswald might have ended up staying in a fine hotel just the same. (112)

Judyth and Oswald actually planned to meet in Chichen Itza, Mexico -- 125 miles from present-day Cancun. (113)

Judyth and Oswald actually planned to meet in Merida, Mexico -- 200 miles from present-day Cancun. (114)

Judyth and Oswald actually planned to meet in Belize, Mexico -- 350 miles from present-day Cancun. (Note: There was no Belize in 1963; it was called British Honduras until years later.) (115)

Judyth and Oswald actually planned to meet in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico -- well over a thousand miles from present-day Cancun. (116)

Judyth and Oswald actually planned to marry in the Cayman Islands of the Caribbean; Cancun was just a stopover. (117)

Judyth and Oswald actually planned to marry in Mexico. Exploration of ancient Mayan ruins and a visit to a large city in the Yucatan were additional possible plans. After marriage, their final destination was probably going to be the Cayman Islands. (118)

END QUOTE

Again, for a detailed exposition of all the footnotes (and much other information on the Judyth story), just go Reitzes website (and again, to this link, for the footnotes):

http://www.jfk-online.com/judyth-story.html

After reading the above I in no way can believe Judyth. She is a superb researcher, but here she was caught off guard and red-handed.

Another thing: I have not yet read any details about Judyth's brushes with death. I would like to hear about them.

Kathy C

[Pamela Brown]

QUOTE: "The actual location was not where Lee and I expected to go to a hotel, only to meet . . . we were going to then go explore Chichen Itza, which was supposed to be relatively close, and ruins, all of which we believed from a book [sic] we read together was in Quintana Roo . . . we were going to go to a fine hotel...maybe that was a joke of Lee's...and we were going to get a Catholic priest to marry us." UNQUOTE

((DSL comment: Attention All Readers Please Note: Lee, an atheist, and married to Marina, loving his daughter June, and happily expecting the birth of his second child. . . was planning to go off with this lady “to get a Catholic priest to marry us” ?! - - -Oh pleeez.))

Jim

How can you possibly defend this crazy statement that Judyth made?

How can you contradict the evidence that LHO was sending Marina back to USSR and, oh, by the way, left his wedding ring on the bureau on 11.22.63?

That means nothing, maybe his ring was bothering his finger and LHO took the ring off to rub his finger and forgot to put it back on

It has happened to me, it has happened to my wife

You have discounted all the evidence that shows that LHO was trying to send Marina back to USSR. Oh, let's not forget that after NOLA they didn't live together. Add to that the fact that Marina complained that she didn't know where Lee was when they lived in NOLA, didn't even know he had been fired from Reily until two weeks later. Add it all up and what do you get?

(hint: another woman).

Are you going to try to tell us that if there were another woman involved in all these shenanigans that Marina had no suspicion? If so, there is beautiful bridge in NYC you may be interested in.

[Pamela Brown]

You have discounted all the evidence that shows that LHO was trying to send Marina back to USSR.

I'll try again.

...and he'd lose his kids?

And just in case it's lost on you I'll ask you one more time to be sure.

...and he'd lose his kids?

Nevertheless, this was the path LHO was pursuing. Why not accept that?

[Barb Junkkarinen]

How can you contradict the evidence that LHO was sending Marina back to USSR and, oh, by the way, left his wedding ring on the bureau on 11.22.63?

Pamela

I'm not disputing that Oswald left his wedding ring at the Paine residence on the morning of the assassination and also know that there are letters to the Soviet embassy from both Marina and Lee requesting to go back to the Soviet Union.

What I would dispute is that Lee was sending her back alone. I don't believe for a second that Lee would give his kids up in this manner. Marina would quite obviously get custody.

What are others thoughts?

Lee

Hi Lee ... okay, here's my two cents ...

What we know Oswald was doing on the evening of Thursday, November 21, 1963, was trying to get his family together ... wanting to get an apartment so they could all live together, him going out of his way to make up to her, help her with chores and playing with his babies that evening. And he promised her a washing machine. Marina, by her own telling, treated him badly that night ... she was in a snit and was not responsive to his pleas.

That doesn't sound to me like a man planning to ship his wife and kids off to Russia ... and/or run off with another woman. He may have left his wedding ring behind as a message of sorts to Marina because he was hurt by the way she treated him the night before.

Bests,

Barb :-)

[Pamela Brown]

You have discounted all the evidence that shows that LHO was trying to send Marina back to USSR.

I'll try again.

...and he'd lose his kids?

And just in case it's lost on you I'll ask you one more time to be sure.

...and he'd lose his kids?

Nevertheless, this was the path LHO was pursuing. Why not accept that?

Accept what? That he was prepared to lose the one thing he actually unconditionally loved in his life? His daughters!

I can accept that letters were sent to the Russian Embassy (by both Marina and Lee - or persons unknown) but I also accept that we'll never know why they were sent? But you perhaps think your guess is better than other guesses?

Can you accept that Lee said to consider his request separately? Did it occur to you to take that seriously?

[Dixie Dea]

Barb, I was going to post almost that same thing...so I do agree with you. Also, in Judyth's book she made the claim that Lee was going to go pick up his kids and they were going to get a crooked (I am not sure if she used that exact word or not) Priest to marry them, in Mexico. Sure, Marina was going to willingly turn over a toddler and a baby to him...yeau right!

In addition, there has been a whole lot of past discussion regarding the CanCun story, as David Lifton has mentioned...you may have as well. Hard to remember everything in this thread. But, after she learned there was no CanCun Resort at that time, she denied ever saying that. Then later she claimed it was her past agent that added it and she had only meant the CanCun area, since she didn't feel anyone would know where nearby Chichen Itza was. (It is not all that nearby though). So, then a woman on the discussion group posted some info that the Village of KanKun had been there for many, many years and she even had a link to an old map, showing it. In addition, that same woman mentioned there had been a nice hotel in Chichen Itza for years....the Mayaland Hotel. Up until that point, Judyth was still denying she ever said it was a fine hotel in CanCun. But suddenly with that new info and after mentrining various places they intended to visit, she ran with it....and later appeared in her book, as her own claim. Now she insists that she had always known about the old Village of KanKun. If so, it never came up until that woman appeared with that info....then sudenly she had always known it and what she meant when speaking to David L. I just do not buy that, at that point in time, when she spoke to him.

She also made the claim that George DeMohrenchildt had told Lee about a Lush, Tropical Paradise, where they were also filming The Night of the Iguana, which was in the area, so they wanted to go there too. Of course, this was at Bandaras Bay, at Puerto Villarto. Nearby???? At the time, I was surprised she had not looked at a Mexico Map....unless she felt no one would know any better. Well, I have been to all those places and I did know!

Much more of course!

Dixie

Edited May 1, 2010 by Dixie Dea

[Barb Junkkarinen]

Judyth and I have discussed this and I don't know why you think you can discredit her on this basis. QUOTE 1 is the basic story: she had told her agent at the time, Peter Cox, that they were going to meet in the Yucatan in the vicinity of Chichen Itz. Lee had not used the name "Cancun", which, as you have observed, did not exist other than in the form of the village of Kankun.

Can you post a pre-1963 map showing this "village" of "kankun" you have referenced more than once?

She put her finger on a map at his request and he said, "Oh, Cancun!", and ran with it.

Chichen Itza is in the state of Yucatan. Cancun ... and the old kankun territory ... are in the state (once territory) of Quintana Roo.....where Judyth wrote, as I posted and quoted earlier in this thread, that she longed to be in Quintana Roo. There was no "village" of kankun. Chichen Itza, Merida, Cayman Islands, the Mayaland Hotel ... none of them are in Quintana Roo.

The new finger on a map thing is amusing, at least. The original excuse was that Judyth had typed "kankun" and her agent had thought he was correcting her spelling ... and from there it became a Mr. Toad's Wild Ride as a parade of different destinations and excuses were handed down. None of it made any sense, of course, especially since there is a draft with a note from Judyth on the top that Judyth sent out to her group as an attachment to an email that explained she had made it through this next section .... which included the last phone call where she had LHO telling her she would go to Cancun. She would stay in a fine hotel, etc ... I believe I posted that early on in this thread ... as well as the e-mail Judyth wrote to Mary Ferrell clearly stating "Cancun" ... as I posted once again just hours ago.

The old, what a tangled web we weave thing comes to mind. It was a real farce, worthy of a Saturday Night Live routine. It only became a big deal because Judyth and her then team turned it into a big deal with all the nonsensical excuses and explanations.

Mexico is a predominantly Catholic country, of course, so they would expect to be married by a priest. There is nothing here that impugns the integrity of Judyth.

This was another knee slapper as Judyth claimed Ferrie (or someone) had told them of an "unscrupulous" priest who would give them "quickie" divorces and then marry them. As one raised in the Catholic Church ...and who claims she once intended to become a nun ... Judyth should have known that no priest (nor any clergy of any faith) can grant divorces. That is a civil legal proceeding.

On the other hand, this appears to me to be a nice example of TRYING TO CREATE A CONFLICT rather than TRYING TO SORT THINGS OUT.

Oh, there was a conflict all right .... and it was downright silly. And it was all sorted out ... many many years ago ... it's just one more thing about Judyth's story that you are way below the curve on. Those who were in it at the time know what happened. You are now privileged, it seems, to a newer version. Which, of course, you run with as the whole truth and lecture everyone else ... some of whom were there for the "real deal" and all of whom can read.

[Barb Junkkarinen]

Barb, I was going to post almost that same thing...so I do agree with you. Also, in Judyth's book she made the claim that Lee was going to go pick up his kids and they were going to get a crooked (I am not sure if she used that exact word or not) Priest to marry them, in Mexico. Sure, Marina was going to willingly turn over a toddler and a baby to him...yeau right!

In addition, there has been a whole lot of past discussion regarding the CanCun story, as David Lifton has mentioned...you may have as well. Hard to remember everything in this thread. But, after she learned there was no CanCun Resort at that time, she denied ever saying that. Then later she claimed it was her past agent that added it and she had only meant the CanCun area, since she didn't feel anyone would know where nearby Chichen Itza was. (It is not all that nearby though). So, then a woman on the discussion group posted some info that the Village of KanKun had been there for many, many years and she even had a link to an old map, showing it. In addition, that same woman mentioned there had been a nice hotel in Chichen Itza for years....the Mayaland Hotel. Up until that point, Judyth was still denying she ever said it was a fine hotel in CanCun. But suddenly with that new info and after mentrining various places they intended to visit, she ran with it....and later appeared in her book, as her own claim. Now she insists that she had always known about the old Village of KanKun. If so, it never came up until that woman appeared with that info....then sudenly she had always known it and what she meant when speaking to David L. I just do not buy that, at that point in time, when she spoke to him.

She also made the claim that George DeMohrenchildt had told Lee about a Lush, Tropical Paradise, where they were also filming The Night of the Iguana, which was in the area, so they wanted to go there too. Of course, this was at Bandaras Bay, at Puerto Villarto. Nearby???? At the time, I was surprised she had not looked at a Mexico Map....unless she felt no one would know any better. Well, I have been to all those places and I did know!

Much more of course!

Dixide

Exactly right, Dixie. Cracks me up because I just launched a reply I had been working on for awhile but kept getting interrupted .... and then saw this post of yours. Seems we are on the same wavelength. We were also in the mix at the time and know what all went down...

Nice to see you here on this thread!

Barb :-)

[Mike Williams]

How can you contradict the evidence that LHO was sending Marina back to USSR and, oh, by the way, left his wedding ring on the bureau on 11.22.63?

Pamela

I'm not disputing that Oswald left his wedding ring at the Paine residence on the morning of the assassination and also know that there are letters to the Soviet embassy from both Marina and Lee requesting to go back to the Soviet Union.

What I would dispute is that Lee was sending her back alone. I don't believe for a second that Lee would give his kids up in this manner. Marina would quite obviously get custody.

What are others thoughts?

Lee

Hi Lee ... okay, here's my two cents ...

What we know Oswald was doing on the evening of Thursday, November 21, 1963, was trying to get his family together ... wanting to get an apartment so they could all live together, him going out of his way to make up to her, help her with chores and playing with his babies that evening. And he promised her a washing machine. Marina, by her own telling, treated him badly that night ... she was in a snit and was not responsive to his pleas.

That doesn't sound to me like a man planning to ship his wife and kids off to Russia ... and/or run off with another woman. He may have left his wedding ring behind as a message of sorts to Marina because he was hurt by the way she treated him the night before.

Bests,

Barb :-)

Barb,

One also has to ask Does this sound like a man who was planning on being killed and or imprisoned the next day? Interesting thought.

Mike

[Barb Junkkarinen]

Barb,

It is the least important of her claims if it does NOT establish anything beyond itself! Them having known each other, in and of itself, means nothing. It is unbelievable to me that you are acting this "clever".

It looks like we just disagree, Greg. Them having known one another is the base of virtually all her claims re New Orleans and the assassination. Thus, it is vital to her entire story that she can establish that she even knew Oswald. Everything else flows from that. I stand by what I said before ...

The "least important" of her claims?? Helloooo? That she knew Oswald is the **base** ... the springboard ... for all of her claims about her adventures in New Orleans that summer and beyond! According to Judyth, Oswald introduced her to Ferrie and Ochsner and Mary Sherman .... lets not forget "Sparky" and Marcello and Thornley and most any other alleged assassination player you care to name. Oswald worked with her in Ferrie's kitchen, she trained him to handle the "bioweapon" for transport. He took her to the mental hospital in Jackson to make sure the "patient" there who had been injected with their little cocktail would die.

She supposedly learned all about the assassination that was coming down from Oswald .... then throw in the love affair, plans to disappear together after the assassination, etc .... and you think her claim of LHO's handwriting in her book, which would establish that she even knew him, is the "least important"?

I am not "acting" "clever" ... it is how I see it and I stated why. Are you trying to be "clever"? :-)

Let's assume for the sake of conversation that the handwriting expert confirmed it was Oswald's writing. At this point you would concede what exactly? Anything? Perhaps you'd concede "the least important" claim? I can hear you now: "Based on this analysis, yes, they probably knew each other, but so what? That still doesn't prove anything else!"

I think I've answered this about 3 times now. If the handwriting is certified by an appropriate professional to be Oswald's handwriting, I would acknowledge that they knew one another. As noted above, I do not think that is the "least important" claim. And, of course, it would prove nothing about her other claims beyond that. How could it? And, as I recall, you agreed it would not.

IMO: Since Jim doesn't need that confirmation in order to believe her, he isn't compelled to pursue it. And, since her detractors still wouldn't be convinced even with the confirmation, he's again not compelled to pursue it.

What Fetzer personally needs is not my problem. All he seems to need on anything is her sayso. What Judyth's claims need are verification. And this is one claim that could be confirmed or denied by having a professional, court approved documents examiner confirm or deny that the writing in her book is that of Lee Harvey Oswald. As I already noted before as well ...This is research. There is a claim. It is a claim that can be confirmed or denied by a professional.

I believe you have stated more than once that you are on the fence regarding Judyth ... you just don't know, haven't had time to do research, verification, etc. Yet you don't seem to think verifying whether or not her claim that LHO wrote these notes in the margins of her book is true is important. Go figure.

Bests to you, Greg

Barb :-)